After nearly two years covering House goings on I can safely say I have come to expect the most unexpected developments. Take, for example, the opposition’s reaction to the government’s proposed amendment to the Millennium Heights Medical Complex Act, No. 1 of 2015. As Prime Minister Allen Chastanet explained it: “The Act provides for the establishment of a board which is responsible for the overall management and administration of the medical complex, including employment of staff. Consequently, any person seeking employment at the medical complex would no longer make that application through the Public Service of Saint Lucia but through the administrative apparatus of the medical complex, and be subject to the conditions of employment therein.”
Additionally: “There may also be instances where personnel may have to be retained or transitioned from the public service to take up duty at the medical complex. Provision was also made for the transfer or secondment of a public officer to the service of the board and the preservation of that officer’s pension rights.”
However: “A transfer under the Pensions Act, Cap. 15.26 does not appear to encompass a movement such as that envisaged in the Millennium Heights Medical Complex Act. Additionally, the Act only makes general reference to who has the power to second a public officer to the service of the Board of the Millennium Heights Medical Complex. In order to cure the inconsistency and ambiguity which arise from the aforementioned, the Bill therefore seeks to amend the Act by, firstly, deleting any reference to the transfer of a public officer to the Millennium Heights Medical Complex and to only make reference to the secondment of a public officer.”
No surprise that the opposition didn’t quite see eye to eye with the prime minister on the matter before the House. The MP for Castries East, Philip J. Pierre, was first to voice his displeasure: “Mr. Speaker, when I got the order paper and a copy of the amendment on Thursday or Friday, it looked very simple to me. But I had to look deeper to find out what was there, knowing the government has a tendency sometimes . . . that in order to kill a rat, they burn a house.”
From my seat in the press box I wondered whether Pierre realized how funny was his last line. Could he possibly have referred to a fellow MP as a rat? And by “house” did he mean a regular home or did he slyly refer to the House of Assembly? As I say, one is never certain when to take at face value statements made during our House debates. (As I write a week later, the William Peter Boulevard fire comes to mind; did the fire result from an electrical problem or was it caused by an arsonist rat?)
“I wanted to find out what really was there and I found out a few things,” Pierre went on. “I found out that a civil servant cannot be transferred from the government service to the private sector. They have to be seconded. A civil servant, I’ll say it again, cannot be transferred from the civil service to the private sector. They have to be seconded. That’s the first thing I found out.”
Never mind the earlier explanation by the prime minister, Pierre seemed hell-bent on digging himself a hole. “I ask the question: Is it because the hospital is going to be privatized? “That was the first question. The second question I want to ask, Mr. Speaker: What will happen to the ward maids and the porters and the people who are not establishment workers? My information tells me that non-established workers cannot be seconded or transferred.”
He had a third concern: “I want to ask the question: What is the state of the transitioning of the hospital? Because I know for a fact that this government has employed an Indian consultancy firm. They have awarded the contract to a firm in India to provide consultancy services. And I know that local people had already been contracted to deal with transitioning of Victoria Hospital. Was that wrong? Was the transition process not correct? Led by Dr. Stephen King. But this government is contracting another set of people.” He seemed to fill his lungs before bellowing: “Foreigners! Another set of foreigners!”
Pierre seemed so pre-occupied that even the super-tolerant Speaker had to intervene: “Leader of the Opposition, don’t take this debate beyond what it ought to be this morning. I am asking you to just note what we are debating.” This to an MP with a quarter century’s worth of House debates under his belt! Somewhat sheepishly the Castries East MP thanked the Speaker for keeping him on track: “I note your guidance and I will follow.” But then he proceeded to repeat himself, insisting that the amendment to the Act indicated that the OKEU was about to be privatized.
Dennery North MP Shawn Edward followed his party leader’s line: “Mr. Speaker, I suspect one of my worst fears is being realized in the parliament this morning and, notwithstanding your guidance to the Leader of the Opposition, I want to state that it is very difficult to discuss the proposed amendment to the legislation without looking at the OKEU hospital in its totality. Mr. Speaker, like the Leader of the Opposition, I believe the proposed amendment to the legislation is paving the way for the government to give the OKEU to foreign interests for management.”
The MP for Castries Central and a former health minister, Sarah Flood-Beaubrun, said this in response: “Mr Speaker, I do not understand the opposition’s problem with consultancies. I don’t understand it. We bring in consultants for all kinds of projects. What is the problem with hiring consultants to assist us, to work alongside Saint Lucians? It ensures that we benefit from the best practices in healthcare. What’s wrong with that?”
She offered clarification via history: “This is not a new practice in healthcare in Saint Lucia. In 1997, when we revamped the A&E department, we got consultants to advise us on the best way forward. If I remember correctly, we got personnel from the Howard Medical Center in Miami. They came here, worked alongside us, and that was how we were able to revamp the A&E.” Her words may have resurrected in Pierre’s mind too many bad memories of an earlier “Sister Sarah”. He stood on a point of order and, like a friend turned rat, squealed: “Mr. Speaker, you ruled a few minutes ago that I should not stray.“ Then again, perhaps he was simply striking a blow for the laudible idea of fair play.
This was Flood-Beaubrun’s cutting retort: “The honorable member was not interrupted when he spoke about consultancy. He spoke as though he had a problem with the government of Saint Lucia finding some specialized persons who are capable, who have run hospitals, world-class hospitals, to help us run the OKEU.”
Trust the Castries Southeast MP Guy Joseph to sugar the bitter lesson. “I have tried to maintain consistency,” he said, his famous Guy smile in plain sight. “When I’m in opposition, I don’t sing a song to get me into government and then, once I’ve gotten there, I sing another tune. That’s what the opposition does.”
Quoting from Hansard, he revisited his contribution to the 2015 Millennium Heights Medical Complex Act debate: “Mr. Speaker, I have concerns about what will happen to the workers and how the transition will be facilitated. Who is going to be responsible and what is the arrangement? Because, if the board is fully responsible for the complex, I also need to ask whether the size of the Ministry of Health will be reduced.”
Back in the moment, he said, “These were legitimate concerns back then. There was no plan; they never had a plan. That is why they have never been successful at anything they attempt.”
But the best line at Tuesday’s session came from former prime minister Kenny Anthony: “Let me say that there’s no argument to sustain the point that you are privatizing the Millennium Heights Complex. The statutory board mechanism has always been used by governments to express their legal personality!”
As they say, in the house not a rat moved!
